Hölderlin`s Ode `Natur und Kunst oder Saturn und Jupiter`

Hölderlin`s Ode `Natur und Kunst oder Saturn und Jupiter`

374
375
Götz Schmitt
se mehr und Wichtigeres geschehen als eine Änderung der politischen
Formen. Es geht um ein Leben im Einklang mit der Natur und den
„Himmelskräften" (und die großen geschichtlichen Ereignisse der Zeit
seien bedeutsam nicht so sehr durch ihre Folgen auf der politischen Ebene als durch die seelischen Erschütterungen und die Wandlungen, die sie
in den Menschen bewirken können, zuerst in der Seele des Dichters).
Hölderlin hat das in den großen Gedichten des Jahres 1800 zu erfassen
gesucht, so im Entwurf der Ode 'Dichterberuf' vom Sommer 1800 der
'
aus der Keimzelle von 'An unsere großen Dichter' erwachsen ist. Etwas
davon ist auch schon 1798 im Blick, wenn es heißt: ,,gebt/ Uns Leben".
Was Hölderlin da von den großen Dichtern verlangt, ist, oder wäre, ein
vollwertiges Äquivalent, und mehr als das, für den Freiheitskampf in
der Ode 'Die Schlacht'.
Aber auch dort tritt das im engeren Sinn Politische gegenüber der inneren Bewegung zurück. Die Polemik gegen die Fürsten, die im Vorentwurf von 1796 so breiten Raum einnahm, ist nicht aufgenommen (sie
hätte freilich nur anonym und im Ausland veröffentlicht werden können). In der Schlachtszene geht es um die Macht der Seelen, um Begeisterung und Opferbereitschaft. Hölderlin, so kann man es im geschichtlichen und biographischen Kontext lesen, will den Geist der
französischen Revolution und Republik, wie er ihm einst erschienen
war, nach dem großen Siege von Mons, und den zuerst die Schreckensherrschaft, dann Geldherrschaft und Gewinnsucht und zuletzt, in der
Schweiz, Arroganz der Macht verdorben hatten, in seiner ursprünglichen Reinheit beschwören und herüberretten in seine erhoffte, oder erträumte, Revolution der Deutschen.
Hölderlin's Ode 'Natur und Kunst oder Saturn und Jupiter'
and Cleanthes' 'Hymn to Zeus'
A Note on Hölderlin's
Stoicisml
By
Charles Lewis
In a series of studies, Jochen Schmidt has drawn attention to the significance of Stoicism for Hölderlin's poetry and thought.2 Schmidt has
pointed, in particular, to the presence of Stoic elements in the Ode
'Dichtermuth', which are evidence of a close reading of Marcus Aurelius.3 In a survey of the subject, he suggests three phases in Hölderlin's
reception of Stoicism: an early phase (represented by the poem 'Das
Schiksaal') inspired by Seneca's concept of virtue, and influenced by
Schiller; a second phase influenced by the Stoic philosophy of nature
(e.g. 'Brod und Wein', 'An den Aether'); and, more debatably perhaps,4
35, 2006-2007, Tübingen 2007, 375-396.
HöLDERUN-JAHRBUCH
1 Thanks are due to the Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung, for its earlier
support of research of which this is a belated result. For helpful advice and
comments I am also grateful to Adam Brown, Charlie Louth, John Seilars, and
the editors.
2 Jochen Schmidt: Hölderlins später Widerruf in den Oden 'Chiron',
'Blödigkeit' und 'Ganymed', Tübingen 1978; Hölderlins geschichtsphilosophL
sehe Hymnen 'Friedensfeier', 'Der Einzige', 'Patmos', Darmstadt 1990; Hölderlins dichterische Rezeption der stoischen Ethik und Naturphilosophie. In:
Text+Kritik,Sonderband Friedrich Hölderlin, hrsg. von Heinz Ludwig Arnold,
München 1996, 33-50. See also various places in Schmidt's commentaries to
the poems, e.g. to 'Menons Klagen um Diotima', in: Friedrich Hölderlin.
Sämtliche Werke und Briefe [Klassiker Ausgabe = KA], hrsg. von Jochen
Schmidt, 3 Bde., Frankfurt a.M. 1992-1994; here KAI, 706-708.
3 Hölderlins später Widerruf [note 2], Ch. III, and KAI, 768-776. See also
Hölderlins geschichtsphilosophischeHymnen [note 2], 106-145 ('Der Einzige').
4 Anke Bennholdt-Thomsentakes issue in this respect with Schmidt's interpretation of 'Mnemosyne': see Bennholdt-Thomsen: Dissonanzen in der späten
Naturauffassung Hölderlins. In: HJb 30, 1996-1997, 15-41; 29 f.
376
Charles Lewis
a final phase dominated by the Stoic notion of cosmic conflagration or
"ekpyrosis" .s
lt appears, however, that commentators have not considered the possibility that one of Hölderlin's most important poems, the programmatic Ode 'Natur und Kunst oder Saturn und Jupiter', may have been
inspired (or at least provoked) by an Ancient Stoic text: namely Cleanthes' 'Hymn to Zeus'.6 Such a claim may appear paradoxical to some.
For Hölderlin's Ode is sometimes read solely as a critique of Jupiter, or
Zeus, a rejection of his law-giving in favour of the benign lawlessness of
feeling, the realm of Saturn.
Conversely, such an exercise might appear tobe of merely antiquarian interest, or (what is worse) to deflect attention from more contemporary influences on Hölderlin.7 But it is more than a question of
sources and influences. The possibility must be considered that, in composing a poem addressed to Zeus, Hölderlin was engaging in a dialogue
with the earlier poem. If that is the case, the Stoic hymn will be essential to our appreciation of Hölderlin's Ode.8 We would not, of course,
s Hölderlins dichterische Rezeption [note 2], 48.
6 For this Hymn see Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff: Kleanthes.
Hymnus auf Zeus. In: Reden und Vorträge, 4. umgearbeitete Auflage, Bd. 1,
Berlin 1925, 306-332, which includes the German translation of the Hymn
(325-327) reproduced at the end of this essay. Fora more recent German prose
translation, by Peter Steinmetz, see Die Hellenistische Philosophie, hrsg. von
Heilmut Flashar, Bd.4/2, Basel 1994, 577-578. An Englishtranslation by Long
and Sedley is at A. A. Long and D. N. Sedley: The Hellenistic Philosophers,
Cambridge 1987, vol. 1, 326f., and the Greek at vol. 2, 326f. (also in Hans von
Arnim: Stoicorum veterum fragmenta, Leipzig 1995, I. 537). See further Günther Zuntz: Griechische philosophische Hymnen, aus dem Nachlaß hrsg. von
Hubert Cancik und Lutz Käppel, Tübingen 2005, 25-42.
7 Cf. Jürgen Link: Hölderlin - Rousseau. Inventive Rückkehr, Opladen/Wiesbaden 1999, 12-19.
8 In his commentary to the Ode in KAI, 752-756, Schmidt emphasisesthe
critique of Zeus's law-giving that it contains, but does not consider the extent
to which (by inscribing himself in the Stoic tradition) Hölderlin may also be
paying homage to it. As regards philosophical sources, Schmidtconcentrates almost exclusively on Proclus and Plotinus. See also, in the same sense, Jochen
Schmidt: Geschichtsphilosophische Poetologie. Hölderlin's Ode 'Natur und
Kunst oder Saturn und Jupiter'. In: Poetologische Lyrik von Klopstock bis
Grünbein, hrsg. von Olaf Hildebrand, Köln 2003, 83-97. Among the numer-
Hölderlin's Stoicism
377
wish to ignore the differences between Hölderlin's Ode and Cleanthes'
Hymn. Cleanthes' text appears to have a cultic, as weil as a philosophical, significance. As Lang and Sedley have observed, the Hymn "conveys the depth and power of his religious sentiments, presenting in the
traditional clothing of the Greek hymn a god who is at once the Zeus
of popular religion, the ordering fire-god of Heraclitus, and the Stoic
providential deity" .9 By contrast, Hölderlin's Ode is far from being a vehicle of religious piety. lt is also far from being concerned solely with
Zeus: in addressing him, Hölderlin is also reflecting upon the role of the
poet, and on the law-giving peculiar to poetry. Despite being addressed
to Zeus, the Ode is not an exercise in theology (or Heraclitean cosmology) but rather a key text in Hölderlin's poetics.
ous commentaries to Hölderlin's Ode, see Lawrence Ryan: Hölderlins Lehre
vom Wechsel der Töne, Stuttgart 1960, 213-217. - Emil Staiger: Hölderlin.
Drei Oden, II. In: Meisterwerke deutscher Sprache, Zürich 4 1961, 25-39. Wolfgang Binder: Hölderlins Namenssymbolik. In: HJb 12, 1961-1962,
95-204; 110-112. - Lawrence Ryan: Zur Frage des 'Mythischen' bei Hölderlin. In: Hölderlin ohne Mythos, hrsg. von Ingrid Riede!, Göttingen 1973,
68-80; 73-75. - Peter Szondi: Einführung in die literarische Hermeneutik,
hrsg. von Jean Bollack und Helen Stierlin, Frankfurt a.M. 1975, 389-394. Uwe Beyer:Mythologie und Vernunft. Vier philosophische Studien zu Friedrich
Hölderlin, Tübingen 1993, 81-82. - Ernst Möge!: Natur als Revolution.
Hölderlins Empedokles-Tragödie, Stuttgart/Weimar 1994, 136-138. - Ulrich
Gaier: Hölderlins Ode über die Mythologie. In: Interpretationen. Gedichte von
Friedrich Hölderlin, hrsg. von Gerhard Kurz, Stuttgart 1996, 125-141. Gerard Raulet: 'Natur und Kunst, oder Saturn und Jupiter'. Mythos und Modeme bei Friedrich Hölderlin. In: "Unvollständig, krank und halb?" Zur
Archäologie moderner Identität, hrsg. von Christoph Brecht und Wolfgang
Fink, Bielefeld 1996, 17-24. - Henning Bothe: Jovialität. Anmerkungen zu
Hölderlins Ode 'Natur und Kunst oder Saturn und Jupiter'. In: HJb 30,
1996-1997, 226-234. - Luigi Reitani: Friedrich Hölderlin. Tutte Je liriche, Milano 2001, 1698-1706. -Alexander Honold: Hölderlins Kalender. Astronomie
und Revolution um 1800, Berlin 2005, 102-113.
9 Long and Sedley [note 6], vol. 1, 332. On Cleanthes as an interpreter of
Heraclitus, see Roman Dilcher: Studies in Heraclitus, Zürich/New York 1995,
178, and A. A. Long: Heraclitus and Stoicism. In: id., Stoic Studies, Cambridge
1996, 35-57. And on the affinity of Stoic and Heraclitean thought, see Charles
H. Kahn: The art and thought of Heraclitus, Cambridge 1979, 44; Emile
Brehier:Chrysippe et l'Ancien StoYcisme,Paris 21971, 141f., 176f.
378
Hölderlin's Stoicism
Charles Lewis
I
lt is in fact overwhelmingly likely that Hölderlin was familiar with the
'Hymn to Zeus'. In the period shortly before the composition of 'Natur
und Kunst', Hölderlin was working on his tragedy based on the death
of Empedocles.10 The sources for the Empedocles-project have been
analysed by Uvo Hölscher, who has observed that Hölderlin will have
had access to the collection of Empedoclean fragments included in the
sixteenth-century compilation 'Poesis Philosophica', published by Henri Estienne (Henricus Stephanus).11 But Estienne's book also includes
texts of Cleanthes, the most substantial among which is the 'Hymn to
Zeus'.12 Assuming that Hölderlin made use of the anthology, Cleanthes'
poem - which is by any Standards a striking work - cannot have esca ped his attention, not least on account of its high literary qualities.
Hölderlin may weil have recognised in Cleanthes another philosopherpoet (and reader of Heraclitus). The Hymn was in any case widely
known, being reproduced (together with a Latin translation) in Ralph
Cudworth's widely-read 'The True lntellectual System of the Universe'
(1678). As Cudworth observes: "But because many are so extremely unwilling to believe that the Pagans ever made any religious address to the
supreme God as such, we shall here set down an excellent and devout
hymn of the same Cleanthes to him [... ]". An annotated Latin transla10 The beginning of November 1800 has been suggested as the date for the
composition of the Ode: see Friedrich Hölderlin. Sämtliche Werke, Frankfurter
Ausgabe [FHA]. Historisch-kritische Ausgabe, hrsg. von Dietrich E. Sattler, 20
Bde. und 3 Supplemente, Frankfurt a.M. 1975 ff.; here FHA 5, 789. The Empedocles-project occupied Hölderlin between summer 1797 and the beginning of
1800: see Friedrich Hölderlin. Sämtliche Werke und Briefe [Münchner Ausgabe
= MA], hrsg. von Michael Knaupp, 3 Bde., München/Wien 1992-1993; here
MA III, 329 and 352.
11 Poesis Philosophica [... ], [Geneve] 1573. See Hölscher: Empedokles von
Akragas. Erkenntnis und Reinigung. In: HJb 13, 1963-1964, 21-43; 23f., and
similarly MA III, 328; and see also Hölscher: Empedokles und Hölderlin,
Frankfurt a.M. 1965, 13f. On Stephanus as a source for Hölderlin's reception
of Heraclitus see Dieter Bremer: "Versöhnung ist mitten im Streit". Hölderlins
Entdeckung Heraklits. In: HJb 30, 1996-1997, 173-199; 174.
12 Poesis Philosophica [note 11], 49-50: 'CLEANTHIS CARMINA.Ex Sto-breo [...]'; the source is the anthology of Stobaeus (probably 5th century A.D.).
379
tion of Cudworth's book was published in Germany by Johann Lorenz
Mosheim in 1733, and the work would have been familiar to Hölderlin
from his student days in the Tübingen Stift; Mosheim's commentary
was then included in subsequent English editions.13
Hölderlin will have found an account of the Stoic deity in Diogenes
Laertius, which was also an important source for him in this period:
God is one and the same with Reason, Fate and Zeus; he is also called
by many other names. [... ] The world, in their view, is ordered by reason and providence [... ] inasmuch as reason pervades every part of it,
just as does the soul in us. [... ] The deity, say they, is a living being, immortal, rational, perfect or intelligent in happiness, admitting nothing
evil into him, taking providential care of the world and all that therein
is, but he is not of human shape. He is, however, the artificer of the universe and, as it were, the father of all, both in general and in that particular part of him which is all-pervading, and which is called by many
names according to its various powers. They give the name [... ] Zeus in
so far as he is the cause of life or pervades all life [... ].14
Thus Zeus, for the Stoies, was one name for a divine principle of reason
which is immanent in the universe, and which expresses itself in a cosmic order which is accessible to the human intellect. As a principle of
reason and order, he constitutes the common principle that founds both
human action and understanding,
on the one hand, and the natural
world on the other. The Stoic universe is a deterministic one, in which
13 See Cudworth: The True Intellectual System of the Universe [... ], London
1845; the Hymn and the quotation in the text above are at Vol. II, 117-119 of
that edition. For the importance of Cudworth in the reception of Empedocles,
and as a source for the formula "One and All" later popularised by F. H. Jacobi, see Hölscher: Empedokles und Hölderlin [note 11], 14, 48-49. See also MA
III, 328. For Cudworth in the Tübingen Stift, see M. Sc. Marcio dos Santos
Gomes: Die ontologische Zirkularität. Hölderlins Vorsokratiker-Rezeption und
ihr Einfluß auf seine Poetologie [Diss. Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena 2004],
25-30.
14 Diogenes Laertius: Lives of the eminent philosophers, ed. and trans. R.
D. Hicks, Cambridge Mass./London 1925, VII, 135-138 and 147; cf. Hölderlin's letter of 24.12.1798, MA II, 722. The same work will have provided another source for his Empedocles-drama: see MA III, 327.
380
Charles Lewis
everything which happens necessarily happens, according to a chain of
causation identified with the reason or will of Zeus.15
According to myth, Zeus was the son of the older god Kronos,
whom he dethroned and imprisoned along with the Titans (Hesiod:
'Theogony', v. 485-505). The Stoies gave the myth what can (loosely
speaking) be termed an 'allegorical' interpretation, although it is perhaps more accurately described as an exercise in speculative etymology:
By Saturn [...] they denoted that being who maintains the course and
revolution of the seasons and periods of time, the deity actually so designated in Greek, for Saturn's Greek name is "Kronos", which is the
same [sie] as "chronos", a space of time. [... ] Saturn was bound by Jove
[i.e. Jupiter] in order that Time's courses might not be unlimited, and
that Jove might fetter him by the bonds of the stars.16
In the title to his Ode, Hölderlin employs the Latin versions of the gods'
names: respectively Jupiter and Saturn. This is probably because he is
concerned to emphasise the peaceful aspects of the older god, in contrast to the ferocious reputation of the Greek god Kronos (who is none
the less evoked in Hölderlin's final stanza).17 The Latin names are also
used (anachronistically) in Hölderlin's Empedocles-drama, where in his
final scene Empedocles shouts "Jupiter Befreier!" (Erster Entwurf, MA
I, 833). These are in fact the dying words attributed to the Roman Stoic philosopher Seneca: a connection which is not without interest in the
present context.18 Jupiter is identified by Hölderlin with Art (to be understood as including reason, law and language), Saturn identified with
15 See Plutarch: Moralia, ed. and trans. Harold Cherniss, Cambridge
Mass./London 1976, XIII 1056C.
16 Cicero: De Natura Deorum, ed. and trans. H. Rackham, Cambridge
Mass./London, 1972, II, xxv. On Stoic etymology, see Long: Stoic Studies
[note 9], 71. Michael Franz has noted that Hölderlin possessedan editionof Cicero's collected works; see Franz: Hölderlins Logik. Zum Grundriß von 'Seyn
Urtheil Möglichkeit'. In: HJb 25, 1986-1987, 93-124; 96.
17 See Gaier [note 8], 129; Honold [note 8], 103-104; and Martin Vöhler:
Hölderlins Arbeit am Titanenmythos. In: Symbolae Berolinensesfür Dieter
Harlfinger, hrsg. von Friederike Berger u. a., Amsterdam 1993, 421-437; 425.
18 See Michael Franz: Jupiter Befreier.In: HJb 27, 1990-1991, 152-154;
153f.
Hölderlin's Stoicism
381
the Nature which precedes Art, and forms the basis for the order and
division imposed by the latter. And it also seems clear that, for Hölderlin, it is Zeus who imposes the iron law of temporal succession on the
peaceful reign of Kronos. All this has been explained frequently in the
commentaries to the Ode.19 Furthermore Peter Szondi has drawn attention to the related distinction in 'Friedensfeier', between "Der stille Gott
der Zeit" and the god of (what Szondi terms) "historical" Time, for
whom Hölderlin uses the revealing epithet "Herr der Zeit".20
At first sight, Hölderlin's Ode appears to be a trenchant critique of
the sovereignty of Zeus, and a plea for the rights of the older god. lt is
true that several commentators have seen that the ultimate message of
the Ode is more balanced, giving each of the two divine powers its
due.21 And it would be surprising if it were otherwise. Hölderlin's Ode
is contemporary with his elaboration of his theory of the Alternation of
Tones ("Wechsel der Töne"), and the idea that the life of a poem consists in the constant alternation or modulation of its elements is one of
Hölderlin's basic insights, both in that theory and elsewhere. lt is revealing that, in the manuscript sources, the poem is found next to the
Poetological Tables in which Hölderlin gave an algebraic formulation of
the Alternation of Tones. That theory is itself based on an opposition
between the unexpressed "Grundton" of a poem and its articulated
"Kunstcharakter" .22 And Schmidt has rightly pointed to the famous
statement in the concluding letters of 'Hyperion': "Wir stellen im Wechsel das Vollendete dar; in wandelnde Melodien theilen wir die großen
Akkorde der Freude." (MAI, 750)
The element of change and transformation - "Wechsel" and "Wandeln" - is just as essential to Hölderlin's poetics as is the reference to the
all-encompassing unity of the 'One and All'; and both elements can be
traced to the Stoic conceptions of a unified cosmos mied by divine prov-
19 See e.g. KAI, 755 f., and Schmidt: GeschichtsphilosophischePoetologie
[note 8].
20 Szondi [note 8], 394; MA I, 364, v. 79-90 (and cf. MA I, 360, v. 58:
"Herrschaft").
21 See e.g. Szondi,Raulet and Bothe [note 8].
22 The connection with 'Natur und Kunst' is noted by Ryan: Hölderlins
Lehre [note 8], 216.
382
Charles Lewis
Hölderlin's Stoicism
idence, which is none the less subject to the vicissitudes of Time.23This
is the lot of human kind, as dispensed by Zeus: unceasing change under
divine law.
One feature of Hölderlin's Ode should be evident from the beginning
- namely, that the Ode, as much as Cleanthes' Hymn, is at the outset
addressed directly to Zeus.24 But unlike Cleanthes, Hölderlin does not
offer up a simple sang of praise to Zeus; in his case, praise is made conditional upon the fulfilment by Zeus of a prior condition. Hölderlin will
sing the praises of Zeus only if Zeus grants him in return the right to
sing of his father Kronos, the deposed god of a vanished golden age.
II
For ease of comparison with Cleanthes' Hymn, we shall refer in the first
instance to the eloquent translation by Wilamowitz. lt is striking that,
at several places, the Wilamowitz version is closer to Hölderlin than
other versions that have been consulted. lt is as if this eminent classicist
(and Pindar-scholar) responds in a similar way to Cleanthes' Greek. By
way of control, therefore, the more literal English version of Long and
Sedley will also be cited. Again for comparison, certain key words will
be emphasised.
The Hymn begins:
Höchster der Unsterblichen,
viele Namen nennen dich,
ewig allmächtiger Zeus,
dich, den Urquell alles Werdens,
der nach ewigen Gesetzen
herrschest im All, ich grüße dich, Zeus.25
23 Cf. Schmidt: Hölderlins dichterische Rezeption [note 2], 36-37, referring to the concept of unceasingchange in Senecaand Marcus Aurelius,and see
Ryan: Hölderlins Lehre [note 8], 95 n. 57.
24 Cf. Ryan: Hölderlins Lehre, [note 8], 214-216, and see Ryan: Zur Frage
des 'Mythischen' [note 8], 74 (emphasisingthat the poet, in the Ode, belongs
to the realm of Jupiter).
25 Wilamowitz'stranslation is reproduced at the end of this essay,with the
section numbering of Long and Sedley [note 6] added. Cf. Long and Sedley:
383
Like Cleanthes' Hymn, Hölderlin's Ode begins with a direct address to
Zeus, the supreme law-giver:
Du waltest hoch am Tag' und es blühet dein
Gesez, du hälst die Waage, Saturnus Sohn!
Und theilst die Loos' und ruhest froh im
Ruhm der unsterblichen Herrscherkünste.
(MAI, 285, v. 1-4)
Thus the note of praise for a god who is 'most high', 'majestic' or 'famous' - all these are possible translations of Cleanthes' opening ward
"xuöun"' - is sounded from the beginning in Hölderlin's Ode. Note also that, in this case, the more literal translation: "with your law" is in
fact closer to Hölderlin's "dein Gesez" than the Wilamowitz version:
"nach ewigen Gesetzen".
In his final stanza, Hölderlin declares Zeus to be worthy of praise:
Dann hör' ich dich, Kronion! und kenne dich,
Den weisen Meister, welcher, wie wir, ein Sohn
Der Zeit, Geseze giebt und, was die
Heilige Dämmerung birgt, verkündet. (MAI, 285, v. 21-24)
And Cleanthes' Hymn, too, concludes with a reaffirmation of the poet's
wish to honour Zeus:
Und gewürdigt solcher Ehre
ehren dann wir deine Würde,
allzeit deine Werke preisend,
wie dem Sterblichen geziemt.
Denn die Götter und Menschen
haben kein schöneres Vorrecht,
als nach Würdigkeit immer
lobzusingen dem einen
alles umfassenden Weltengesetz.26
"Most majestic [xuÖlor] of immortals, many-titled, ever omnipotent Zeus,
prime mover of nature, who with your law [v6µou µha] steer [xußEQVfüv]all
things, hail to you."
.
26 Wilamowitz [4]; Long and Sedley: "so that by winning honour
384
Hölderlin's Stoicism
Charles Lewis
Thus both poems begin by singing praise to Zeus, and end by reaffirming that praise, and in each case single out Zeus's majesty, power and
law. But it is also notable that, in both cases, the final affirmation is
made subject to a condition. For Cleanthes, the poet will be able to
praise Zeus when, by forsaking the example of "the bad among mortal
men, the wretched", he has achieved the power of judgment.27 lt is true
that the condition, in Hölderlin, is startlingly different. In Hölderlin's
Ode, the poet will only continue to sing the praise of Zeus if Zeus, in
turn, acknowledges the right of his deposed father, Kronos. This is of
course an exact reversal of the position in Cleanthes, where the poet
achieves the ability (or right) to praise Zeus by putting aside error and
accordingly becoming able to follow him. In Hölderlin, it is Zeus who
achieves the right to be praised, by acknowledging the power of Kronos
and granting the poet the right (or ability) to name the older god: see
the final two stanzas of Hölderlin's Ode.
But arguably, the reversal by Hölderlin of the position in the Cleanthes does not make a comparison any less apt. The Ode may be conceived as a critical riposte to the Hymn, but an essential element of its
structure (although it is inverted) is surely preserved: the praise of Zeus
becomes possible only when a certain condition is fulfilled. For Cleanthes, because Zeus is by definition the supreme god, the condition can
only be that the poet is himself granted the judgment which enables him
to worship Zeus. In Hölderlin, an the other hand, Zeus is no langer the
only god to be praised. The older god, his father, must also be acknowledged. And once Zeus makes that possible, the younger god can
be acknowledged in his turn. Zeus has to become deserving of praise it is not only the poet who has to become worthy to praise.
lt may be objected that the reversal is so dramatic that Hölderlin has
fully departed from Cleanthes' schema. By the end of the Ode, the poet
[nµl]8EvtE~]we may repay you with honour [uµft), for ever singing of your
works, as befits morta/s [8Vl]T6v]to do. For neither men nor gods have any
greater privilegethan this: to sing for ever in righteousnessof the universallaw
[v6µou]."
27 Long and Sedley[3-4): "the bad among mortal men, the wretched [...]
devoid of intelligence,they rush into this evil or that [...] Scatter this from our
soul, Father. Let us achieve the power of judgment by trusting in which you
steer all things with justice, so that by winning honour [...]".
385
and the god stand side by side, and the law-giving of the poet is assimilated to that of Zeus himself. And that is of course the significance of
Hölderlin's title, in which the figures of Jupiter and Saturn appear as allegories respectively of Art and of Nature. We shall return later to the
question whether Hölderlin may have been responding to other models
or sources. In any event, the example provided by Cleanthes would not
exclude those other influences.
Meanwhile, other points of comparison with the Hymn can be noted. The stanza which Hölderlin omitted from his fair copy of the Ode:
Denn wie aus dem Gewölke dein Bliz, so kommt
Von ihm, was dein ist, siehe![ ...] (MA III, 159)
echoes Cleanthes' description (in section [4] of the Hymn) "Zeus of the
dark clouds and gleaming thunderbolt"; and section [2] contains other
notable references to the thunderbolt by which Zeus steers all things.
Note also the revealing contrast between Hölderlin's emphasis an the
namelessness of Saturn (MAI, 285, v. 12), and Cleanthes' "many-titled"
Zeus.
Another striking point of comparison is in the idea that poet and god
are from a common stock. Thus the opening lines of the Hymn, already
cited, continue as follows:
Ja, ich darf's. Es ist der Mensch
dir verwandt. Allein von allem,
was da lebt und kriecht auf Erden,
ist ein Abbild er des Alls:
wir sind deines Geschlechtes.
Und so will ich immerdar
preisen dich und deine Macht.28
28 Long and Sedley[1]: "For it is proper for any mortal to address you: we
are your offspring [yev6µw8a], and alone of all mortal creatures which are
alive and tread the earth we bear a /ikeness to god [8eoü µiµl]µa]. Therefore I
shall hymn you and sing for ever of your might." Note, however, that
Stephanus here has the unamended text: "ytvo~ foµi::v"and "ijxou µ[µl]µa";
the first gives an equivalent sense (Zuntz [note 6]: "aus dir sind wir von
Geschlecht"), but the latter is corrupt and obscure (seeSteinmetz [note 6], 578).
386
Hölderlin's Stoicism
Charles Lewis
And in his final stanza, Hölderlin too declares kinship between god and
poet ("wie wir, ein Sohn"), a kinship which turns out to be even closer
than in the case of Cleanthes.
The kinship of poet and god is reinforced in Hölderlin's Ode by the
fact that the supreme god, Zeus, is referred to as "Saturnus Sohn" in the
first stanza, and as "Kronion" (i.e. "son of Kronos") in the final stanza. Thus Hölderlin lays claim to a closer affinity between poet and god
than any that can be found in the Stoic hymn. For Cleanthes, Zeus is
simply the 'father', and we are his images or offspring; but for Hölderlin both Zeus and the poet have the status of 'sons'. And at this point
Hölderlin goes still further. We are not only sons, like Zeus: we are sons
"of Time" ("wie wir, ein Sohn/ Der Zeit"). One sense that can be given to the expression 'son of Time' is: mortal, subject to Time's dominion; and in that sense, Hölderlin's final stanza again echoes Cleanthes
closing lines. But in no sense can Zeus himself be described as 'mortal'.
What then can be the meaning of this enigmatic formula?
III
Since Zeus is the son of Kronos, the most straightforward explanation
of the formula "ein Sohn der Zeit" is in terms of the tradition equating
"Kronos" with "Chronos", making Saturn or Kronos the personification of Time. This explanation is accepted by Schmidt (KAI, 758 f.), albeit with the slightly puzzling gloss that Kronos is to be understood as
the "überzeitliche und vor aller Zeit stehende Fülle der Zeit" of
"stoisch-pantheistischer Spekulation" (Schmidt's interpretation seems
here to be inspired more by the Neoplatonic than the Stoic tradition).29
The immediate difficulty there, however, is that in his penultimate
stanza Hölderlin has already contrasted the 'changing time' ("die wan-
29 SeesimilarlySchmidt:Geschichtsphilosophische
Poetologie[note8], 89,
and Gaier: Hölderlins Ode über die Mythologie [note 8], 129 (suggestingthat
Kronos is a "Zeitgott" who is none the less "zeitlos").In contrast, Staiger[note
8], 27 is insistent that no equation of Kronos and Chronos is intended:"Im
Gegenteil!Die Zeit ist erst, seit Jupiter die Welt beherrscht.[...] Die Zeitgehön
zu ihm"; and similarlyMöge! [note 8], 137.
387
delnde Zeit")30 of Zeus with a return to the apparently timeless world
of Kronos, where Time is rocked to sleep in its cradle:
Und war in ihrer Wiege mir, in
Wonne die wandelnde Zeit entschlafen,
(MAI, 285, v. 19f.).
In what sense, therefore, is Hölderlin subscribing to the allegorical reading, or speculative etymology, of Kronos as Father Time?
That difficulty will only be insuperable if there is a single species of
Time, that which is abolished in the realm of Saturn. However, it is
worth recalling again the place in Cicero in which the Stoic doctrine is
reported: "By Saturn [... ] they denoted that being who maintains the
course and revolution of the seasons and periods of time. [... ) Saturn
was bound by Jove in order that Time's courses might not be unlimited,
and that Jove might fetter him by the bonds of the stars". That might
be read as a reference to two distinct species of Time: one which Jacks
fetters and limits, and seems to be connected with the rhythm of natural periods and seasons; and one by virtue of which a certain order is
imposed (that of fate or providence, identified with the will of Zeus).
To what extent, then, does Hölderlin's expression "ein Sohn / Der
Zeit" play on such a double meaning of Time? There is a place in the
manuscript sources for 'Natur und Kunst' which may shed light on that
question. In an earlier draft of the Ode, Hölderlin's manuscript contains
the following lines:
Dann kenn' ich dich Kronion! [... ]
De[n] weisen Meister, welcher
Der Zeit Geseze giebt [...]. (FHA 4,274)
If one compares those lines with the corresponding lines in the final version of the Ode (MAI, 285, v. 21-23), it can be seen that the description
of Zeus: "welcher / Der Zeit Geseze giebt" becomes the epithet: "ein
Sohn/ Der Zeit". In other words, the idea of giving laws to (Saturn's)
Time is replaced by that of Jupiter as the son of Time. Thus at one stage of
the process which led to the final version of Ode, Hölderlin may have
30
Or (in the variant adopted by Schmidt)"die wechselndeZeit".
388
Charles Lewis
conceived the relationship between Jupiter and Saturn in terms of two
forms of Time: an unordered Time of Kronos, and a Time resulting from
the law-giving of Zeus, in which limits or divisions are imposed.
At least one commentator, Victor Goldschmidt, has claimed that a
dual theory of Time is central to Stoicism, and that the distinction
emerges clearly in Marcus Aurelius.31 lt is true that, in this respect, there
are a number of difficulties. The sources of Stoicism - which span the
Greek and Roman worlds - are many, varied, and often fragmentary. To
what extent, then, can a single 'theory of Time' be found which would
be valid for Stoicism as a whole, and to what extent is this reflected in
a terminological distinction (say between "Chronos" and "Aion")? But
the interest of Goldschmidt's account, for our present purposes, is that
it resonates with themes which are certainly to be found in Hölderlin.
And at the terminological level at least, there does seem to besuch a distinction in Marcus Aurelius. Thus "atcbv" is used consistently to refer
to an infinite Time in which individual things vanish; and conversely,
"xgovo~" is typically (if not invariably) used to express a finite Time
which can be experienced in the present, or which can span a human
life.32
On Goldschmidt's account there is, on the one hand, the 'present' as
the Time of corporeal processes; and, on the other, the 'past' and the 'future' as forming the empty Time of incorporeal events. According to
that distinction, there is a Time which belongs to the physical present,
and which is limited only by the corporeal action occupying that present; and an infinite Time which can be imagined by thought, and which
imposes external divisions and limits on the present. The 'present' exists to the extent that it "belongs" [u:rragxnv] to a corporeal action or
31 See Goldschmidt: Le systeme Sto'i"cienet l'idee de temps, Paris 31977,
39-40; and see the virtuosic development of this theme in Gilles Deleuze:
Logique du sens, Paris 1969, 13-21, 74-82, 152-158, 190-197.
32 Marcus Aurelius: Meditations, trans. Maxwell Staniforth, Harmondsworth 1964; Marci Aurelii Antoni: ad se ipsum, hrsg. von Joachim
Dalfen, Leipzig 1987. See 2.12, 4.3, 4.43, 4.50, 5.24, 6.15, 6.36, 6.59, 7.10,
7.19, 11.1, 12.7, 12.32 ("atcbv"); and contrast 1.17, 2.4, 3.7, 3.11, 4.6, 4.48,
6.23, 6.25, 6.49, 7.29, 7.46, 8.44, 10.1, 12.18, 12.35 ("XQ6vo;;").Cases in
which Marcus has to qualify XQ6vo;;as "infinite" (2.14, 10.31) merelyconfirm
that distinction, since they show that the implication of finitude has to be expressly removed.
Hölderlin's Stoicism
389
process, whereas 'past' and 'future' have nothing which can supplement
their status as mere "incorporeals" .33 This is the spectre of infinite
Time: both infinite in extent (because it can stretch endlessly in the
directions of past and future) and infinitely subdivisible (because any
given present can be divided into a past and a future component, separated only by an extensionless point). The corporeal present is dissolved
by this species of pure, incorporeal Time, precisely by being ordered into the sequence of past and future moments. Conversely, for Goldschmidt the moral doctrine of the Stoies can be interpreted in terms of
the imperative to attend only to the exigencies of the present. If passion
enslaves us to the past or the future ("au temps irreel"), moral action
inhabits the sole reality, that of the present ("le seul temps reel, le
present, [... ] le seul ou puisse se placer l'initiative morale").34
Goldschmidt's account of these matters can of course be disputed.
None the less, there is evidence that Hölderlin himself operates with just
such a distinction between a corporeal Time of Nature, and an incorporeal Time of Art. On the one hand, there is changing or fleeting Time,
which divides and abolishes the present in the hurtling progression from
past to future, and which is central to the reflections of Marcus Aurelius: "Reflect upon the rapidity with which all existing things, or things
coming into existence, sweep past us and are carried away. The great
river of Being flows on without pause [... ]; while ever at hand looms infinity stretching behind and before - the abyss in which all things are
lost to sight. "35 And then there is Time as experienced in the corporeal
present. In the language of Hölderlins Ode: in the cradle of the present
("Natur"), the changing Time of past and future ("Kunst") is rocked to
sleep.
lt is therefore worth recalling other places in Hölderlin where the image of the rocking cradle is linked with an experience of the present. In
33 See Goldschmidt [note 31], 30-40; and cf. Brehier [note 9], 58.
34 Goldschmidt [note 31], 193.
35 Marcus Aurelius [note 32], 5.23, and similarly 4.43. For the Heraclitean
origin of the river as the image of universal flux, see Long: Stoic Studies [note
9], 57. As Schmidt has observed [note 3], this is surely the "flüchtige Zeit" of
Hölderlin's contemporary Ode 'Dichtermuth'. Cf. the "tearing rapidity" of
Time in Hölderlin's later theory of Tragedy: MA II, 310.
390
Charles Lewis
'Andenken', a moment of balance or repose at the March equinox is described:
Zur Märzenzeit,
Wenn gleich ist Nacht und Tag,
Und über langsamen Stegen,
Von goldenen Träumen schwer,
Einwiegende Lüfte ziehen. (MAI, 474, v. 20-24)
One could say: if the lengthening, or shortening, of the days represents
the progress of "changing time", the equinox represents a moment in
which temporal progress is temporarily halted (while still remaining a
moment within the temporal continuum).36 Ulrich Gaier has made a
connection between that passage, and the following lines from
'Mnemosyne':
Vorwärts aber und rükwärts wollen wir
Nicht sehn. Uns wiegen lassen, wie
Auf schwankem Kahne der See.· (MAI, 437, v. 15-17)
Gaier also observes that these lines recall the famous passage m
Rousseau's 'Reveries' where he describes the sensation of plenitude in
the present moment, experienced by the lac de Bienne.37 Looking neither "forwards" nor "backwards", therefore, also means: looking neither to the future nor the past, those creatures of thought; experiencing
the present of Nature, with its rhythms and seasons.
36 Cf. 'Der Rhein' (MAI, 347, v. 182f.): "Und ausgeglichen/ Ist eineWeile
das Schiksaal". See also Pindar's Second Olympic Ode, in Hölderlin's translation at MA II, 190, v. 109-112 and v. 126-130.
37 Ulrich Gaier: Hölderlins vaterländischer Gesang 'Andenken'. In: Hjb 26,
1988-1989, 175-201; 181f. - Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Les reveries du promeneur solitaire. In: CEuvrescompletes, ed. par Bemard Gagnebin et Marcel
Raymond, vol. I, Paris 1959, 1040-1049 (Cinquiemepromenade); 1042-1046
and N.B. the editor's note 2 at 1799 ("une forme absolument homogeneet indifferencieedu temps"). - See similarlyLink [note 7) 40f. and 156. - The connection between "Wiege" in 'Natur und Kunst' and the Rousseau-allusionin
'Mnemosyne' is also made by Bothe [note 8), 232f.
Hölderlin's Stoicism
391
Accordingly, in Hölderlin's Ode, the relationship between Jupiter
and Saturn is not one between a temporal and an atemporal condition,
but rather (we would argue) between two distinct species of Time.
When Jupiter's Time is rocked to sleep in the cradle of Saturn, it is
"changing" or "fleeting" Time which gives way to the moment of stability or repose in the present. lt follows that those arguments which
characterise the realm of Saturn as one of simple timelessness can be
seen to rest upon an equivocation, for they presuppose that "Time" can
only be used in the sense of "die wandelnde Zeit" .38From one point of
view, that distinction might be described as between a 'sacred' Time of
seasonal rhythms and processes, in which the same events endlessly recur, and a 'profane' Time of historical change.39
But such a distinction is also central to Hölderlin's poetics of the
"Wechsel der Töne". According to that doctrine, it is the cyclical recurrence of tones which gives substance and unity to the poem, and which
enables the whole to be felt as if in a single present (as it were, the unity of Saturn). But this takes place through a continual alternation of
tones, which is a temporal process governed by a poetic calculus or law
(the law of Zeus). Accordingly, the opening paragraph of the langest of
Hölderlin's poetological sketches from this period ('Wenn der Dichter
einmal des Geistes mächtig .. .') expounds the competing demands for
"Gemeinschaft und einiges Zugleichseyn aller Theile", on the one hand,
and "Fortschritt und Wechsel", on the other (MA II, 77). Andin another poem of this period ('Mein Eigentum'), Hölderlin conceives of the
sanctuary established by the poem as a refuge from the ravages of
changing Time; here too the reference to the Rousseau of the 'Reveries'
is unmistakable.40 lt is as if the moral imperative of the Stoies, namely
to seize the present, becomes the poetic task of constructing the unity of
the poem.
38 Cf. Staiger (note 8], 27 and Möge! [note 8], 137. Conversely, Binder
[note 8], 110 seems more accurate when he refers to Jupiter as "Herr der
»wechselndenZeit«", Saturn as "Gott der »goldenen Zeit«".
39 See Beyer [note 8), 70f., and cf. Szondi's characterisation of Jupiter as
the god of "historical Time" [note 8], 394.
40 MA I, 237f., v. 45-47; see Bernhard Böschenstein: Hölderlin und
Rousseau. Der Garten als Asylund Elysium.In: HJb 33, 2002-2003, 118-121.
392
Hölderlin's Stoicism
Charles Lewis
IV
We now seem to have travelled some distance from Cleanthes. For
Cleanthes' Hymn concerns a Zeus who gives laws to the realm of
'Natur', as much as to the human world of 'Kunst'. On that account,
there is in principle no conflict between those two realms, only a harmony established by the law of Zeus itself. Cleanthes' praise is unqualified by any acknowledgment of a silent, lawless realm, whose disorder
might threaten the calm world of the surface, and which might indeed
haunt the imagination of a less optimistic Stoic.41 Might this be an argument against a claim that Cleanthes' Hymn is essential for the appreciation of Hölderlin's Ode?
There is no doubt that there were other, more contemporary, sources
which may have prompted both Hölderlin's treatment of the figures
Jupiter and Saturn, and his use of them as an allegory of the relationship between Art and Nature. For example, there was the notable
example of Schiller's elegy 'Natur und Schule' (1795). That poem was
later. rewritten, and republished (in August 1800) under the title 'Der
Genius'. Schiller portrays poetic genius in terms of a return to the harmony of the Golden Age, the resurrection of a lost unity of law and feeling. 42 An even more interesting precedent is provided by Friedrich
Schlegel's 'Rede über die Mythologie' (1800). In that text, Schlegel employs the myth of the dethronement of Saturn to represent the fate of
Spinoza at the hand of Kant and his successors. As both Reitani and
Gaier have observed, this may well have been the immediate stimulus
for Hölderlin's own use of the myth.43 Of more interest still, perhaps, is
the curious expression that Schlegel uses in the opening paragraph of his
'Rede', when referring to the rule of "Kunst" over the "Geist der
Liebe": "[die] nothwendig[e] Willkühr". For the same expression occurs at a key point in one of Hölderlin's poetological texts, as "[die]
41 See Deleuze [note 31], 191f. (discussingthe extent to which, even for
Stoicism, "Saturne gronde au fond de Zeus"); and cf. Vöhler [note 17], 424
(ambivalenceof "Natur" in Hölderlin).
42 Schiller:Gedichte,Erster Theil, Leipzig 1800, 23-27.
43 Athenaeum, hrsg. von A. W. und F. Schlegel,Bd.3, Berlin 1800 (Reprograph. Nachdruck, Darmstadt 1992), 99f. - On Schiller and Schlegel as
sources, see Reitani [note 8], 1700f., and Gaier [note 8], 126f., 138f.
393
nothwendige Willkür des Zevs" (MA II, 106), where it is used to designate the principle of division of a primordial unity. Accordingly, from
Hölderlin's perspective both Saturn and Jupiter can be said to be present in Schlegel's text, and to represent an opposition between the principles of unity ('Natur', Spinozism) and of division ('Kunst', the Critical
Philosophy).
However, none of this explains why Hölderlin should have responded by writing a poem addressed directly to Zeus: one which both begins
and ends with such an address, and which lays down the conditions under which a Stoic god can be praised. This aspect of the Ode is particularly striking when one compares 'Natur und Kunst' with other similarly 'poetological' odes of this period: that is to say, odes which
concern the nature of poetry or the vocation of the poet. Thus the poet
is addressed directly in 'Ermunterung' (MAI, 277-279), a poem with
several striking thematic correspondences with 'Natur und Kunst'; and
again in 'Dichtermuth' (MAI, 275f., 284f.). In 'Dichterberuf' (Erste
Fassung, MAI, 269-271) the poet is compared with a divine figure: not
the god Jupiter in this case, but Bacchus. But while the triumph of Bacchus is narrated in the opening stanza of 'Dichterberuf', Bacchus is not
himself addressed. And conversely, it is the poet who is addressed in the
second stanza ("Und du, des Tages Engel!"), where Hölderlin celebrates
the prospect of a poetic law-giver ("gieb die Geseze, gieb / Uns Leben,
siege, Meister!"). Again, the thematic resemblance with 'Natur und
Kunst' is unmistakable: here the poet as legislator. But while Nature is
briefly addressed in the penultimate stanza of this version, 'Dichterberuf' is surely not an ode to Bacchus in the way that 'Natur und Kunst'
is an ode to Zeus.
lt is this peculiarity of 'Natur und Kunst' that allows us to regard the
Ode as a transformation of Cleanthes' Hymn, however striking the differences between the two. The transformation is of course a radical one.
By making Kronos the god of 'Natur', the law-giving of Zeus is removed to the realm of 'Kunst'. And the same operation permits the poet to recognize himself in the latter god, both in his potential weakness
and in his strength. Like Zeus, his law-giving is in <langer of forgetting
the lawless unity from which it derives. The prayer to Zeus is accordingly transformed into a critique, and that critique in turn becomes an
act of self-examination. The poetic laws that Hölderlin will formulate
394
Hölderlin's Stoicism
Charles Lewis
in this period - the rules of the "Wechsel der Töne" - accommodate
both of the elements that we have found in the Ode. The rigorous algorithm of those rules generates the element of law-like progression, the
linear passage from past to future. But a place is also found for a moment in which the progression is suspended or reversed, in the paradoxical unity of the present.
Cleanthes: Hymn to Zeus
[1] Höchster der Unsterblichen,
viele Namen nennen dich,
ewig allmächtiger Zeus,
dich, den Urquell alles Werdens,
der nach ewigen Gesetzen
herrschest im All, ich grüße dich, Zeus.
Ja, ich darf's. Es ist der Mensch
dir verwandt. Allein von allem,
was da lebt und kriecht auf Erden,
ist ein Abbild er des Alls:
wir sind deines Geschlechtes.
Und so will ich immerdar
preisen dich und deine Macht.
[2] Dir gehorcht das Weltgebäude
kreisend um den Erdenball.
Willig wandelt's in den Bahnen,
die du weisest mit der Waffe
deiner Herrscherhand, dem spitzen,
leuchtenden, lodernden, nimmer erlöschenden,
ewig lebendigen Blitz.
Und das All gehorcht erschauernd,
wo des Blitzes Kraft es trifft.
Also regelst und verteilest
du Vernunft, Gesetz und Leben,
die von den feurigen Wellen getragen
alles durchströmen. In großen und kleinen
Leuchten des Himmels, in sausenden Winden,
wallenden Wogen, starrenden Steinen,
Pflanzen und Tieren, in allem, was atmet,
wirket belebend dein Blitz,
Himmelskönig, Herr des Alls.
[3] Nichts geschieht, o Gott, auf Erden,
nichts im reinen Himmelsäther,
nichts im Meer, was du nicht wirkest,
außer den Taten der Bösen,
die sie in eigener Torheit begehn.
Aber du verstehst aus unpar
par zu machen, einzuordnen
auch was widerstrebt, in Einklang
wandelst du die Dissonanz.
Einern Ganzen fügt sich alles,
Gut und Böse, es herrscht im Weltall
einzig und ewig Gesetz und Vernunft.
Dem versuchen sich die Schlechten
zu entziehn, sie stell'n sich abseits.
Toren, immer lockt sie etwas
als ein Gut, verlangend haschen
sie danach, und sie verschließen
Aug und Ohren dem Gesetze
Gottes, das für alle gilt.
Wenn sie ihm nur folgen wollten,
könnten sie mit rechter Einsicht
Lebensbefriedigung finden.
Doch sie trotzen der Vernunft,
streben eigewill'gen Sinnes
nach den verschiedensten Zielen.
Dieser ringt und buhlt um Ehre,
jener frönt dem schnöden Gelde,
träger Sinneslust der dritte,
aber Frieden findet keiner,
immer von neuer Begierde gehetzt.
395
396
397
Charles Lewis
[4] Zeus, der du aus dunkler Wolke
herrschest mit dem Flammenblitze ,
Geber alles Guten, löse
von des Irrtums Fluch die Menschen ,
daß wir die Wahrheit erkennen ,
deine Weisheit,
Vater, in der du das All
lenkest mit Gerechtigkeit.
Und gewürdigt solcher Ehre
ehren dann wir deine Würde ,
allzeit deine Werke preisend,
wie dem Sterblichen geziemt.
Denn die Götter und Menschen
haben kein schöneres Vorrecht,
als nach Würdigkeit immer
lobzusingen dem einen
alles umfassenden Weltengesetz.
(Übersetzung Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff)
Harte Fehler. Hölderlins Grabstein
Von
Michael Strauch
Auf dem Stadtfriedhof Tübingen wird am Samstag, den 10. Juni 1843,
der Leichnam Hölderlins beigesetzt. Hölderlin ist am Mittwoch, den 7.
Juni, gegen 23 Uhr im Haus der Familie Zimmer gestorben.
Noch vor November des Jahres hält Carl Gok (1776-1849), Halbbruder des Verstorbenen, Rücksprache mit Christoph Theodor Schwab
(1821-1883). Der Mitherausgeber des Sammelbandes von Hölderlins
Gedichten (1842/1843) soll Gok hinsichtlich der Inschriften für ein zu
errichtendes Grabmal beraten. Heinrike Breunlin (1772-1850), Schwester des Dichters, will ihr Gedenken an den Bruder auf dem Grabstein
ebenfalls zum Ausdruck bringen. Das führt bald zu unangenehmen Kollisionen mit Stiefbruder Gok. Er besteht darauf, das Denkmal in Eigenregie erstellen zu lassen. Die voraussichtlichen Kosten, 100 fl. (Florin:
Gulden), sollen mit dem Verlagshonorar für Hölderlins gesammelte
Schriften (sie erscheinen 1846) verrechnet werden.!
Gok beauftragt dann den Tübinger Baumeister Christian Uber2, einen Grabstein nach Entwurf des württembergischen Hofbaumeisters
und Architekten Ludwig Gaab (1800-1869) anzufertigen. ,,Wann der
Grabstein aufgestellt wurde, ist nicht bezeugt. "3 Vermutlich geschieht
dies im Herbst 1844, etwa eineinhalb Jahre nach dem Tod Hölderlins.4
35, 2006-2007, Tübingen 2007, 397-409.
HöLDERLIN-JAHRBUCH
1 Vgl. Hölderlin. Sämtliche Werke. Stuttgarter Ausgabe [StA], hrsg. von
FriedrichBeißner und Adolf Beck, 8 in 15 Bdn., Stuttgart 1943-1985; hier StA
VII 3, 415 f.: Vertrag Goks mit Cotta, 24. April 1844.
2 Zu Christian Uber sind dem Verfasser keine Lebensdaten bekannt.
3 StA VII 3, 423.
4 Helmut Hornbogen: Der Tübinger Stadtfriedhof. Wege durch den Garten
der Erinnerung, Tübingen 1995, 18.